Breaking News

Wednesday round-up

This morning the Court heard oral arguments in Welch v. United States and United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc. Rory Little previewed Welch for this blog, with additional coverage coming from law students Michael Levy and Reymond Yammine for Cornell’s Legal Information Institute. Miriam Seifter previewed Hawkes for this blog, with other coverage coming from law students Sonia Gupta and Gerard Salvatore for Cornell. Robin Bravender at Greenwire profiles an Idaho couple from a similar case in 2012, Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency.

Yesterday the Justices issued a one-sentence per curiam opinion in the public-employee unions case, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, affirming the decision below by an equally divided Court. Lyle Denniston covered the decision for this blog, with additional coverage coming from Todd Ruger at Roll Call, Howard Mintz of San Jose Mercury News, Tony Mauro and Marcia Coyle at The National Law Journal (subscription of registration required), and Brittany Felder at Jurist. Commentary comes from Jason Ritchie at The National Law Review, Trevor Burrus at Cato at Liberty, Michael Doyle at McClatchy, Greg Sargent at The Washington Post, Adam Feldman at Empirical SCOTUS, Daniel Hemel and David Louk at Medium, and Matthew Watkins and Neena Satija at The Texas Tribune.

The Court yesterday also ordered supplemental briefing in Zubik v. Burwell, asking both sides to provide alternative proposals for administering the Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate. Lyle Denniston covered the order for this blog, with additional coverage coming from Nina Totenberg of NPR and Tony Mauro of The National Law Journal (subscription or registration required). Timothy Jost at Health Affairs Blog provides commentary on the order, and Steven Mazie at The Economist and Alina Salganicoff at Medium discuss last week’s oral arguments in the case.

Yesterday the Court heard oral argument in Sheriff v. Gillie. Ronald Mann has analysis for this blog, with additional coverage from Dominic Yobbi at Jurist. Monday’s oral arguments in Betterman v. Montana continue to generate interest. Coverage comes from Adam Liptak of The New York Times and Danielle Blevins of Talk Media News. Mark Joseph Stern at Slate, Greg Lipper at Harvard Law’s Bill of Health blog, and Justin Sadowsky of Dubitante provide further commentary. On Monday the Court also heard oral arguments in CRST Van Expedited v. EEOC. Ross Runkel covered the arguments for this blog, with additional coverage coming from Danielle Blevins of Talk Media News.

Commentary relating to the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to succeed Justice Antonin Scalia comes from Daniel Hensel at Article 8 and Laurence Tribe, in an op-ed for The Boston Globe.


  • Tony Mauro at Supreme Court Brief (subscription or registration required) reports that Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Samuel Alito are “filling the gap left during oral argument by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death.”
  • John Grimm Maryland Appellate Blog discusses the possible impact of the Court’s recent per curiam decision in the stun-gun case Caetano v. Massachusetts on three Maryland jurisdictions with laws banning stun guns.

Recommended Citation: Andrew Hamm, Wednesday round-up, SCOTUSblog (Mar. 30, 2016, 2:34 PM),